Important Point—Underlying principle behind doctrine of merger is that there cannot be more than one decree.

1. The petitioners who are employed as Senior Assistants in the Department of Commercial Taxes in the State of Andhra Pradesh have come up with the present writ petitions challenging a common order passed by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad, in a batch of original applications filed by the 1st respondent in each of these writ petitions.

2. Heard Mr. J. Sudheer, learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Government Pleader for Services-I (Andhra Pradesh), Mr. P. Suresh Reddy, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. B. Ranganadh Rao, learned counsel for the original applicants before the Tribunal and Mr. P.V. Krishnaiah, learned counsel appearing for the impleaded respondents.

3. The issue involved in these writ petitions lies in a very narrow compass. A group of persons (1st respondent in each of these writ petitions) who got transferred from various other departments to the Commercial Taxes Department as Junior Assistants way back on 01-01-1996, approached the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad, challenging the Seniority List dated 02-12-2009 contending that they should be placed above persons who were appointed directly to the Commercial Taxes Department, but who were undergoing probation on the date of the transfer. By a common order dated 31-10-2012 the Tribunal allowed the applications on the short ground that as per Rule 35(b) of the Andhra Pradesh State and Subordinate Services Rules, 1996, persons who were transferred from other departments to the Commercial Taxes Department are entitled to be placed in the Commercial Taxes Department just below the last of the approved probationers, but above those who were undergoing probation.

4. It appears that the original applicants before the Tribunal purportedly impleaded few probationers in their original applications, but they were not represented before the Tribunal.

5. The State filed a batch of writ petitions in W.P. Nos. 38328, 38813, 38330 and 38331 of 2013 challenging the said order of the Administrative Tribunal dated 31-10-2012 passed in O.A. No. 473 of 2010 batch. A Division Bench of this Court dismissed the writ petitions filed by the State, by an order dated 10-3-2014. Therefore, in order to implement the order of the Tribunal, the State took steps for the revision of the Seniority List. Immediately the petitioners in these writ petitions, who were not parties before the Tribunal, sought leave and have come up with the present writ petitions challenging the order of the Tribunal.

6. Five contentions are raised by Mr. J. Sudheer, learned counsel for the petitioners; (1) that the writ petitioners were not made parties to the original applications and hence the original applicants before the Tribunal were guilty of procuring an order behind the back of the affected parties; (2) that the original applicants before the Tribunal were guilty of wilful suppression of material particulars in their original applications, as a consequence of which they were not entitled to any relief; (3) that the order of the Tribunal is contrary to Rules 35 (b) and 36 (i) of the A.P. State and Subordinate Services Rules, 1996 as well as the Proviso (iii) under Rule 15 (1) of the A.P. Ministerial Service Rules, 1998; (4) that the Tribunal failed to appreciate the fact that even as per the orders of transfer, the original applicants before the Tribunal were liable to take seniority below the approved probationers as well as the probationers in the Commercial Taxes Department and (5) that in any case the applications of the original applicants were barred by law in view of the fact that at least three Seniority Lists issued earlier by the Department were not challenged by them.

7. In response to the above contentions, it is submitted by Mr. P. Suresh Reddy, learned Senior Counsel for the original applicants before the Tribunal; (1) that a few individuals directly recruited to the Commercial Taxes Department were impleaded as parties to the or